dawg2357

quote:

---

It is, in the very strictest definition, an atheist.

---

It is this strict definition that I have issue with. Now if one wanted to change it slightly to say that an atheist is someone who has the potential to believe yet still lacks that belief then I would be fine with that. However I would think that rules out babies. For example say someone is born stranded from society. As a baby they should not be considered an atheist. However when they grow up still away from society they reflect on nature. They come to the conclusion that this reality did not come to be by an intelligent mind, but simply is all there is for there is no evidence of a mind. I would say this person is an atheist, for even though they have the potential for belief in theism they still lack it.

He was arguing atheism wasn't a belief system. Unless you want to say absence of belief is a belief system.

Ok substitute "atheist" for metaphysical naturalist. I would say you now have a belief.

quote:

---

I haven't met many of these, at least not ones who will admit it.

---

I have, but I'm one of them or at least I like to think I would have the intellectual honesty to reject a false belief no matter how dear it is to me personally. Now I don't think its the majority.

An interesting poll question to ask would be "if there were irrefutable evidence that God doesn't exist would you still believe?". Of course "irrefutable" might be too strong a term.

Many theists will say the same thing. The theist will say that they have reasons for believing and that they have no reason for being an atheist. Some will say they could be convinced either way.

quote:

---

You can say the same for any religion. Mormonism, Islam, Buddhism etc. That doesn't give any of them any more credence as the absolute word of god.

---

I'm well aware. Im not using the argument that because someone outside the faith comes to it later renders that particular faith true. Im arguing against the idea that the origination of an idea, whether by your parents or any other method, renders that idea false by nature of its origination and not the truth value of the idea itself.

quote:

---

There is a common spiritual underpinning to all religions. The religions themselves are manmade subjective interpretations of various unknown men over time.

---

Can I not say the same for your idea? The idea that there is such thing as a universal spirituality is a manmade idea, so it too must fall.

quote:

---

Start objectively investigating the origins and evolution of the Christian religion and, with the information available today online, there is no way you cannot come away with serious questions about what you have been conditioned to believe by parents, society etc. It takes an open mind to look into it.

---

It is never a good thing to assume that a person has not done these things when they hold a different viewpoint.

quote:

---

Watch some Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and really listen to and read what they are saying.

---

Hume, J. L. Mackie, and Bertrand Russell are far better.

I can understand Hitchens and maybe Harris, but Dawkins should never be used as a source of reference for this particular topic.

Add in chaotic focus, fire mine + searing glyph, and fade shield and you have quite a powerful spell as well. You get 1600% weapon damage plus a dot which totals to 1600% from fire mine and searing glyph. The damage is further increased by chaotic focus which takes away 50% of your barrier to increase the damage done by fire spells. Your barrier is then regained because of fade shield which generates barrier from damage done.

quote:

---

You answered your own question why your world is imaginary. You don't base your reality on what you see and experience, which make you delusional and see things that truly don't exist. In another words, your entire perception of reality is imaginary.

---

Then everyone could be said to be delusional. If our reality is based or founded solely on sense perception, then how can anyone justify their sense perception. I cannot justify my sense perception off of sense perception. It is a viciously circular argument. How do I know my senses are trustworthy? They give me reliable information. How do I know that they give reliable information? My senses are trustworthy. Its like an argument from the Bible to God. How do I know God exists? The Bible says so. How do I know the Bible is true? God wrote it.

Essentially the belief that reality should be based on the senses cannot itself be based on the senses rendering a contradiction.

quote:

---

It it's the former...the act of 'dying' is a expansion beyond the individual's limitations into an infinite and Conscious - and loving - Being. If it's the latter...'dying' is the dissolution and absorption of the unique characteristics which form a particular individual (form of life)...into a feeling-less and dispassionate void.

The kicker/trump card...COULD be...that the ultimate experience of death (dissolution)...is SUBJECTIVE; all depending upon the choice/belief/faith of the particular individual.

Two individuals die. Observed (Empirical) death would be the same for the individual who believed in God...as for the one who didn't. However, their (subjective) perception of the dissolution of their limited conscious perception...would be radically different. As one would dissolve into Conscious Love...and the other would simply dissolve.

---

An interesting viewpoint. I have a question however. It would seem that the characteristic of being a unique self or mind would dissolve upon death for having a mind would be part of an individual's essence. If true then how can the self experience or perceive death with the ability to perceive having dissolved?

quote:

---

Because their is a ton of evidence to support religion. From old books from the bible to modern day visits to Heaven and meetings with Jesus.

---

Why must one accept these books? Why not the Upanishads or the Quran? Likewise some Muslims make similar claims of near death experiences. Can that be used as evidence for their belief system?